Britain a democratic country?

We keep on hearing politicians banging on about how democratic this country is. Everywhere else is so uncivilised and ruled by dictators. Am I missing something here? Ian shithead Duncan Smith is now trying to take the right to strike away from those on the lowest pay by withdrawing their family tax credits. We now see someone given an extended ASBO because they want demonstrate against the scronging royal family and the corrupt olympic games.Here we see again the rich, judge "hang the prols" Purdy, snuffing out any opposition to the royals and the olympics and by inference stopping any demonstration that upsets the state (see below). As I have said many times before when are people going to do something about this. When are people going to take to the streets and make these dictators accountable.Time is running out, this country is all ready an  oligarchy and that will soon be become a dictatorship if we don't do anything. RISE UP     



Full Two Year ASBO Imposed On Simon Moore For Peaceful Protest

• travelling around London and elsewhere and passing through and by the various Olympic routes and venues as part of a consequence of taking part in everyday activities including visiting family and friends and even coming to the court today. (in contravention of prohibition 1).

• engaging in peaceful demonstration against unreasonable aspects of the games or other issues in, around or near Olympic venues or routes such as Leyton Marsh.

• Living on disused land and using camping equipment such as sleeping bag, tent and other equipment in order to create low impact sustainable communities. (In contravention of prohibition 3).

I have decided that I would rather live in prison than be entrapped and controlled by fear of breaching the prohibitions contained within this ASBO. Control by fear is a worse prison than physical prison. Only reacting to fear can imprison the mind and spirit.I would also like to take this opportunity to say that the heavy reliance of ASBOs and other forms of coercive or punitive laws to regulate society and prevent ‘anti-social behaviour’ is failing to create a just, peaceful and free society. I think we need a radically different approach to dealing with anti-social behaviour which is based on ‘restorative’ justice.

June 19th, 2012 | Add a Comment

On Monday morning at Westminster Magistrates Court, District Judge Purdy delivered his judgement on the case of the ASBO sought by the ‘Commissioner of police for the Metropolis’ to prohibit various activities; the stated reason being the prevention of ‘conduct leading to the disruption of the Olympic Games events 2012′.

The full text of Purdy’s judgement can be read here.

Scene of the ‘crime’ – Simon (centre) asserts his right to sit peacefully in the Lee Valley Regional Park without interference from large vehicles.

DJ Purdy decided to authorise the ASBO.  He made some minor adjustments to prohibitions 1,2,4 + 5.  He removed prohibition 3 relating to trespassing on land or buildings with camping equipment.  The full text of the amended ASBO (the final order) can be read on the Indymedia link shown above.

Outside the court Simon issued the following statement:

”The effect of this ASBO is to criminalise peaceful protest.  There are legitimate issues for concern around the Olympics such as the destruction of Leyton Marsh in East London for a temporary basketball training facility and the ethics and human rights records of corporate sponsors for the games.  These punitive and coercive laws will not stop us from peacefully protesting or from doing what is right.”

You can read a full report of Simon Moore’s case from the Save Leyton Marshes Campaign here.

Simon represented himself at court as he wanted to politically (rather than legally) challenge the charges against him. This is the statement Simon read out:

“I feel that this ASBO is symptomatic of the nature and feel of the Olympic games in London 2012 and the general state of consciousness of the authorities at this time.

I think it is clear to see from the delivery of London 2012 that these games are not simply about sport and amusement. They involve the channelling of very large amounts of public funds into the hands of private corporations whose primary aim is to make as much profit from their service as possible.

Partly due to this, I believe that a culture of greed has been created as London 2012. It has been reduced from an event which could be a benefit to everyone to a profit making exercise which places private interests above public.

The games offer the government the chance to increase its national and international image and popularity at a time when austerity and turbulence are becoming commonplace. The government appears to be desperate to use the games to better its image.

For these reasons I believe that there is a pathological desire on the part of the authorities and private interests to insure that the delivery of the games is executed to exactly as they intend. This is not a healthy, balanced and reasonable attitude and it is creating negative effects.

The needs of local communities in the areas where the infrastructure of the games are located are being ignored and in many cases overwhelmed or infringed on by the delivery of the games. This is evidenced by multiple examples including:

The intensive and ecologically destructive developments for games related venues on open metropolitan land at Hackney Marshes, Leyton Marsh and Wanstead Flats to name a few. This destruction of local community resources illustrates that the authorities believe is a price worth paying despite how unpopular the decisions have been in the local areas. It feels like a case of: ‘the games must be completed at any cost’.

The pathological desire for results has created an atmosphere of intolerance towards anyone or anything that disagrees with any aspect of the games or its delivery.

This has meant that when local communities have expressed legitimate concerns about the way some aspect of the delivery of the games is being delivered in their neighbourhood, not only have they been ignored, they have been criminalised and penalised. The campaign to Save Leyton Marsh which is made up of residents and locals has been subjected to coercion and intimidation through the use of the law as it attempted to peacefully stand up for the protection of a community space which was taken without their consent for the construction of a basketball training facility. The construction has created a lot of problems for the locals there including the exposure to dangerous toxic waste in areas in which children, adults and animals regularly play, not to mention being effectively locked out of a vital community space indefinitely. Their concerns are legitimate and have not been listened to by the authorities to any degree which could be called understanding.

The use of measures such as the ASBO which are tools to coerce and punish, are being used for those who are engaging in ordinary peaceful demonstration against aspects of the games which are unpopular. They can and are being used to stifle legitimate dissent. This reflects a possible desire by the authorities to ensure that the public image that they are crafting for the games is not tarnished in anyway by peaceful protest. It is a further indicator of a pathological mentality which characterises the undertaking of the delivery of the games

Personally I do not think disrupting the ceremonies or sporting events of the Olympics would necessarily be an effective form of helping to awake people to an injustice. I think there is a risk of alienating and irritating those people who may be open to a message, but are also keen to enjoy these events.

However I believe that this use of punitive and coercive measures to intimidate and punish those who cause or are under suspicion of causing some form of limited, temporary and non-harmful disruption is unreasonable and is symptomatic of the pathological mentality which characterises these Olympics.

This attitude shows no attempt to understand why people have issues with aspects of the games including its delivery, its timing and its relationship with private interests.

The authoritarian nature and behaviour of the authorities in its behaviour in delivering the games are also present in its everyday activities, although perhaps in a less extreme way. It seems that our system of diluted fascism is becoming more fascist everyday. It need not be this way and it is within our power to change it.

In my case this ASBO has imposed on me a challenge whether to proceed with activities which I know are fair and reasonable and by so doing break the law or to succumb to its coercive nature and stop. I have decided to break the law.

The activities which I speak of include:

Sir I would like to put to you that if you think the prohibitions contained within this ASBO are just then you should do as you see fit. However if you see the injustice of this ASBO or any legislation which you think is unjust, you would show the highest respect for the law by resigning your post.”

Well here we go again

El presideti Dave Prentise and unison what can you say. Yet again a deal has been stitched up with the government to the detriment of the workers. Yet again the bureaucracy of this union has rode rough shod over the membership. There has been no consultation with the members and now they are asking members to vote for a pensions package that still makes them worse off than they already are. However you won’t be surprised to see that El Presidenti Prentis is one of those unfortunate fat-cats who earn between £100,000 and £112,950. Someone on that money is subject to personal allowance tapering. This means his marginal rate of tax was 60%.





Rather than pay this rate of tax though, Prentis has engaged in some personal tax avoidance and paid the money into his pension, ensuring the state couldn’t get its hands on it. By doing so he has effectively got a 60% tax relief on those payments. Because the Unison financial year doesn’t match the fiscal year, its not possible to say exactly what Mr Prentis’s pay in 2010/2011 was, but I understand that it was not more than £99,999. El Presidenti also went on record saying “The Government would be better advised to look at plugging tax loopholes for the rich and tackling tax evasion that costs us billions, rather than giving top earners a cash break.” Nuff said Dave!

Its conference season again and what don't we see? a debate on cutting ties with Labour. Daves mates on the standing orders committee ruled a motion on Labour and the trade unions "out of order" as they don't want a debate on the affiliation issue as they know they will loose It is clear that the membership doesn't want any truck with the traitors in the Labour party as less than a third of the membership actually subscribe to the party but Daves waiting for his gong so we mustn't leave.Its also ironic that if a branch doesn't send delegates to conference they are fined, what a joke. A trade union fining its own membership, who the fuck would want to attend their stage managed conference anyway!

El Presidenti Dave is now Non executive director of the Bank of England I don't suppose he will be giving his salary to the union or paying it into his pension. It all becomes laughable, he has is head of the biggest public sector union but he can find time to brown nose. We need to fight to take the power from the right in this union and make it a member led democratic union not this Stalinist junta that we currently have.